Which Helmet? Tips on buying a good helmet

This is a discussion on Which Helmet? Tips on buying a good helmet within Motorbikes, part of the BHP India category; Bought an MT Bladerunner helmet at the SPG outlet in Chennai. It has been over two months with regular everyday ...

Bought an MT Bladerunner helmet at the SPG outlet in Chennai. It has been over two months with regular everyday use as well as highway rides. I have to admit that I was apprehensive at first but this one is amazing VFM! For 5K you get a solid helmet with NFC pairing for SOS. Visor quality is great, no scratches till now inspite of wiping with an assortment of materials on the clear visor. It comes with a built-in sun-visor that cool. Its definitely a head-turner. Very satisfied with the performance as well as fit and finish.

One key advice I would give anyone who wants to buy gear is, never buy them online. Do try in a shop, even if you have to buy online, try the size before buying. Also, the feel of how a helmet fits in you head, how the visor feels in terms of vision cannot be gauged clearly unless you try the helmet.

Need a black visor for an AGV K3. Is there a place from where i can source it locally? Currently have a clear one and on sunny afternoons its not quite nice.

Check with JV promoto (Vikas), he used to sell AGV helmets in Bombay, he can also call for the visor for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by basuroy

Hi , by BMW shoes , do you mean the flat soled offerings from puma or is this a motorcycle riding specific shoe ? I myself enjoy the intimate control offered by flat soles and was considering puma's flat sole range and will appreciate your feedback .

Yes the same ones, they are normal everyday use sports shoes and not motorbike specific. They have decent grip on pebble filled parkings. In the normal day to day riding they are good, toe area is perfect for gear changes as its the right size and they don't slid off the foot pegs. They come in two styles, ankle length and above ankles, i have the ankle length one. In the market there are short riding boots with flat soles. I have the alpinestars SMX 3 (flat sole) for city rides.

Bought a AGV K4 Evo helmet from Dianese store at Orion mall in Bangalore. I am currently using MT Axis and Ls2 helmets. The padding of AGV is very comfortable and helmet is lightweight, comes with Fiberglass shell construction. Paid Rs. 19999. I do not find the price high, as the same helmet online in international sites comes to around $275. Have not started using it, intend to use it only on long rides, which is rare nowadays.

Dianese store is a good option for getting quality riding gears in Bangalore. The variety of items is good. As expected, the price is high for some items like gloves and mesh jackets.

I own an AGV K4 Evo. It a good helmet. Howoever there are a few things to keep in mind:

1. 19 K is good money. So is Evo worth it? No!
2. Its noisy at high speeds. It will scare you to go above 80 sometimes
3. The cheek pads take time to break, and your ears would be pressed against them, and not enclosed within. Keeping earphones will be painful
4. Lining is good, but not exemplary. But comfortable and good for city rides. Highway is another story of noise levels
The air vent performance is average on the chin and quite good on the head. It also has a short chin, so people having prominent chins, may find it difficult to live in

MT I understand is the OE supplier to AGV line. MT Revenge/Axxis/Blade are similar helmets with similar lines and weight are priced in the range of 4-6K. MT Matrix is the lightest one with K4 Evo standard lining, is priced at 8.6K. All are available online with Spartan pro gear. In BLR its available in Megha motors and you could take a look.

The point is simple. You spend 19K on Evo and get a helmet which is good, but not great. You pay 4-6 K for Revenge/Blade/Axxis and you get a similar helmet with lining a bit inferior with similar weight (1450 gms approx) and performance. You pay 8.6 K for Matrix and and you get a helmet which is 1350 gms and has lining as good as K4 Evo and quieter and performs much better in wind (my wife uses one now). Which one would you buy?

Yes in 8-9 K a lot of other helmets are available - HJC, SOL, LS2 etc. etc.

In my opinion you are just paying for the brand. I'm saying this from personal experience. I could have bought an MT and saved substantial amount of money.

I own an AGV K4 Evo. It a good helmet. Howoever there are a few things to keep in mind:

2. Its noisy at high speeds. It will scare you to go above 80 sometimes

>>I used it recently on a trip to Horsley hills. It was not noisy at all, even at triple digit speeds, though not as silent as I expected it to be. I would recommend you to get your helmet checked. I find it better than my MT Axxis. MT Axxis is good with respect to noise, considering the price. I hope the padding of MT Axxis will hold up with usage restricting the noise, unlike LS2 where the padding gave away soon and it became noisy.

3. The cheek pads take time to break, and your ears would be pressed against them, and not enclosed within. Keeping earphones will be painful

>> I get ear pain with MT Axxis helmet. The pain was so bad on a long ride that I was forced to take breaks in between. I think it is because of the shape of MT Axxis - not curvy on sides.
I do not face ear pain with AGV or LS2.

4. Lining is good, but not exemplary. But comfortable and good for city rides. Highway is another story of noise levels

>> I find the padding really good. The feel of padding rubbing against the cheeks is really soft.

I am very happy with AGV on highways. I have used it only on a long ride.

In my opinion, helmet is like a life insurance and it is not possible to know whether it is worth unless a bad crash, god forbid, happens and I do not want to take any chance with helmet. I am very happy with AGV - weight (I get neck pain with MT Axis on long rides - find it more heavier than LS2 and AGV), noise, and padding. The visor is much clearer and really anti-fog. I need to get a tinted visor soon.

How do you know the weight of AGV K4? I do not see it mentioned on the helmet and could not get the information online or from the Dianese store. Thanks for sharing your feedback.

2. Its noisy at high speeds. It will scare you to go above 80 sometimes

>>I used it recently on a trip to Horsley hills. It was not noisy at all, even at triple digit speeds, though not as silent as I expected it to be. I would recommend you to get your helmet checked. I find it better than my MT Axxis. MT Axxis is good with respect to noise, considering the price. I hope the padding of MT Axxis will hold up with usage restricting the noise, unlike LS2 where the padding gave away soon and it became noisy.

Maybe I should, haven't been very comfortable. Good to hear yours works well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatienceWins

In my opinion, helmet is like a life insurance and it is not possible to know whether it is worth unless a bad crash, god forbid, happens [/b]and I do not want to take any chance with helmet. I am very happy with AGV - weight (I get neck pain with MT Axis on long rides - find it more heavier than LS2 and AGV), noise, and padding. The visor is much clearer and really anti-fog. I need to get a tinted visor soon.

How do you know the weight of AGV K4? I do not see it mentioned on the helmet and could not get the information online or from the Dianese store. Thanks for sharing your feedback.

I was also not personally comfortable with Axxis. Revenge was ok for the price, but then Matrix was the best. I have a simple visor on Evo, no pin lock etc. so no anti fog. I had done some surfing on MT Revenge weight and I guess I had seen it on some UK site which sells them. You could weigh it on some vegetable/kaka shop's electronic weighing scale and confirm

Revenge is a tad heavier (+ 50 gems I guess) as its polycarb and not tricomposite like Evo. However Evo with graphics etc. may be a slightly heavier than plane-jane ones. Paint, decals and multiple lacquer top coat adds to the weight

I had read somewhere that the most helmets despite their composition are equally effective in a crash. What makes them different (or pricier) are their comfort levels, weight, features (vents, visor quality etc. etc.) and brand. It is always good to choose a light one. And sub 10K market fortunately has good no. of choices.

Got myself an MT Axxis Atom with a smoked visor, all inclusive for 4.1K from the Spartan Pro Gear Experience Center.

Hey Sourav, I have similar news . Got myself an MT Axxis helmet recently as well (not sure if its a particular model within Axxis though).
The helmet is great by itself - three intake vents and two exhaust (am I using the right term) vents, very comfortable padding, double D rings lock system and I like the (almost minimalistic) look.

The could be better things include the fact that the visor does not completely close when using the tab and I have to close the lid using my palm on the visor, and that the breath deflector seems to be happy to detach from the helmet at every possible opportunity.

Paid about 4.3k at LGU and overall I'm quite happy. This will be a short ride helmet for me and is currently sitting in for a Shoei that I've ordered. Pics of the MT below (also on the riding gear thread).

So finally we have the MT Blade also given its SHARP rating, and surprisingly it gets only 3 stars vs the 5 stars rating for the Revenge.

But then it should not be surprising, the way helmets from the same manufacturer get wildly varying ratings, I wonder if it isn't better they published the actual force measurements to each of the measurement points instead of an overall rating and the schematic showing the color-graded injury index to the forehead, temples and back of the head.

Second, lot of "experts" , both self-proclaimed and those who (allegedly) work in the helmet manufacture/supply/dealer business claim that Arai is undisputed #1 and the safest helmet anyone can buy eyes-closed, any model of theirs.

But check Arai helmet SHARP ratings and even highly acclaimed (by magazines and journos abroad) models like the Arai Quantum and RX7 Corsair have a piddly 3 star rating. Same as MT Blade. And some Arai lids have less - 2 stars, when none of the MTs are below 3 stars.

I have been thinking of getting another helmet, my MT isn't terrible but it is a bit louder than I like and the vents seem superfluous, and does wobble a bit on rough patches despite the snug fit. Now I wonder, if I should pay big once and get an Arai/Shoei , which everyone and his nephew seem to endorse despite not having personal crash experience, or any scientific basis to endorse other than , "hey you don't see Pedrosa , Lorenzo or Marquez wear MT despite being Spaniards, do you ? No, they wear only Arai (Pedrosa) or Shoei (Marquez), the top riders".

Of course, a certain 7 time champion wears a lower credibility (read: el cheapo ) brand , namely AGV , but to these experts, that's only because he has part-ownership stake in it.
The real issue that Moto GP gear and commerical models are, or could be, far different in terms of quality is lost on at least some of the self-proclaimed experts, it seems. That Lorenzo now wears HJC, from a Nolan (XLite) earlier, or that Stoner wore a Nolan too, is immaterial, I suppose.

But why would you be keen on the Sharp ratings over DOT or Snell ratings Ricci? Just wondering coz some of the discussions I've had with premium helmet retailers (in UK primarily) seems to suggest that Sharp ratings / methods of ratings seem to incorporate a lot of subjectivity and may not be indicative of the helmet's performance on the safety front.
Just wondering if you had a different view. Thanks.

The catch is that ratings by DOT/Snell are pass/fail whereas SHARP rates them 1-5 stars, like NCAP. Now that doesn't really tell you all you need to know, but there is further drilling down to do.

DOT is what I consider the best standard, rather than Snell. ECE is similar to DOT, a little less stringent. The issue with DOT is most helmets conform to them, which means pick any - it doesn't tell you which is better. Same with Snell as I gather.

The other factor going against Snell is its standard is 275G vs DOT's 250G. Earlier it was 300G for Snell 2005 standard, even worse (for the impacted head). The less G's the head experiences , the better the helmet. While the Snell is often cited for higher standard of sustaining 2 hits to the same spot, it makes the shell/liner harder and less suitable for cushioning the first impact and transfers more force to the head. Snell 2010 reduced that to 275G or less.

SHARP offers a little more publicly revealed data, with the star rating and the color-coded chart that depicts the (not numerical but subjective) degree of force that will be transmitted to 4 areas of the head - forehead, sides, and back of skull. The 1-5 star rating provides some gradation of models - X better than Y kind. It is possible SHARP ratings have over time been compromised, as was said of the ACU ( required benchmark for British racetracks, you can't participate without an ACU approved helmet) which now is said to be a joke since it can be purchased for a fee and pasted on the helmet for sale.

The catch is that ratings by DOT/Snell are pass/fail whereas SHARP rates them 1-5 stars, like NCAP. Now that doesn't really tell you all you need to know, but there is further drilling down to do.

SHARP offers a little more publicly revealed data, with the star rating and the color-coded chart that depicts the (not numerical but subjective) degree of force that will be transmitted to 4 areas of the head - forehead, sides, and back of skull.

Thanks Ricci for the link - very useful indeed! Though long, I took my time reading and hopefully understanding it
I do have a question for you, considering that the article states that Snell has potentially harder linings to enable the helmets to withstand the double impact and pass the test, thus leading to transmission of potentially higher G forces to the head and brain - would it not make sense to disregard the Sharp ratings altogether, given that they test the helmet with impacts on the front, left, right, rear and crown (effectively 5 impacts)?
Or maybe I understood it all wrong and Sharp actually use different helmets of the same model for each impact. Dunno, confused!
As I see it though, DOT seems to be a very good indicator of a safe helmet given that these have potentially the softest linings to remain within and below the 250 Gs limit. Then again, a manufacturer of murky origins and dishonest intent does not need to pass a test to put a sticker on the helmet, so who knows!

-snip- article states that Snell has potentially harder linings to enable the helmets to withstand the double impact and pass the test, thus leading to transmission of potentially higher G forces to the head and brain - would it not make sense to disregard the Sharp ratings altogether, given that they test the helmet with impacts on the front, left, right, rear and crown (effectively 5 impacts)?

Or maybe I understood it all wrong and Sharp actually use different helmets of the same model for each impact. Dunno, confused!

Regarding SHARP , I can't be sure but tests need not be done on the same helmet for all 4 zones. Even if it is, the assumption is that the impact spots are different each time, so the same helmet , theorectically is still useful for the testing 4 different spots ; this does contradict the idea that the EPS liner is supposed to spread the impact over a larger area ; given the shape of the helmet, though, it's unlikely the LHS side of the EPS liner will be even coming into play of the rider falls on the RHS, similarly , if he falls on the rear of the head, the forehead area EPS liner is hardly called into action. But that's not properly been clarified. Does the head bounce within the helmet on impact, thus after crushing the main impact side, the other side of the liner absorbs the remaining energy from the rebounding head ? Quite possible, and likely , I think, so makes sense to discard the helmet after once crash itself.

The Snell testing standard is for two impacts on the same helmet in the same location , in order to save the head from secondary impact. The assumption is that helmet makes one impact, say the tarmac and the rider slides/rolls into another object, say another car or curb-stone.

The other studies say , in practice this is rare , and rarely the same location on the helmet is hit twice. Rather, they claim this requirement to take two impacts, necessitates stiffer shell+EPS liner , since the EPS liner absorbs energy by crushing in. Since thickness is limited, they have to use stiffer or denser EPS liner that won't crush completely on the first impact. This transmits greater G force to the head, unfortunately. Think of it like a crumple zone for cars. If you require a crumple zone that works to save occupants at 80km/h then it has to be stiffer , so that more energy is absorbed in trying to deform/crumple it, but this makes it less able to absorb energy for the 56km/h impact.

Part of the same spot hit theory is defused by the design of spreading the impact over the shell, so as to distribute the energy over a wider area. I have no credible sources, but it's been said that this is the reason why Arai helmets look a bit different from others, being more evenly rounded or egg-shaped , it helps increase the area of the sides to spread the impact zone.

So isn't the Arai better if it's designed to handler harder impacts , thus safer at high speeds that modern sportbikes do ? Not necessarily, say the studies. The impact speed is more dependent on gravity, in most cases, so you hit the ground at much lower speed, than the linear speed of the motorcycle. The bike you ride may high-side you at 160km/h, but your impact speed is probably 40km/h , travelling in an arc and accelerated by gravity rather than the forward speed of the motorcycle.

The chances of two impacts at the same location on the helmet are probably 1 in thousands, IMHO. Given the nature of highside crashes, one could have multiple hits on the helmets from the same incident but would be extremely rare to see the same spot being hit twice. Moreover, the energy should be greatly diffused after the first impact due to forces of deceleration. Lowsides by their very nature, should in theory therefore be easily handled by a modern helmet which uses good quality EPS.

Coming back to Sharp though, I personally find it difficult to understand the testing methods (as you said - unclear) and therefore unsure of whether high Sharp ratings should be given equal importance as a DOT/ECE/Snell.

In order of importance, I would first select a full face helmet that fit me well, had a comfortable liner, had a safety certification such as the ones mentioned (including Sharp), fit my sense of aesthetic and came from a brand which was well known and proven. The one thing is - I really wouldn't differentiate between a Sharp rating of 3 vs 5 - I don't understand the measure!